The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
UA Plugins , possibly native ? Reverb & Delay Plugins
Old 19th November 2009
  #211
Lives for gear
 
cane creek's Avatar
 

Think a few points are being missed here , when i first started this thread what i was trying to get across was unlike UAD-1 which was very reliable UAD-2 have a great tendency to break from my experience and friends who have them too.

So my whole point was ive spend lots of money on UA plugins having whole projects depending on the UAD-2 card yet never knowing if the card will break again without reason as it has in the past , Remember UA can't keep replacing them especially once the warranty runs out , took about 3 weeks to replace my last broken UAD-2 so my projects were in a 3 week limbo.

If they went native it would remove this big burden/issue , as like i said in earlier posts at the moment i've stopped buying UA plugins are i can't rely on card.
Old 19th November 2009
  #212
Lives for gear
 
DaveC's Avatar
 

Quote:
good example would be the embedded systems running the flight management systems in modern planes - their processors are just a couple of hundred Mhz fast, but even if it had only that one task to do, a core i7 couldn't compete, let alone running a complex operating system like Windows or OS X on top of that.
You know, they still use these old systems in planes, because you really don't want
Windows to be your OS in your cockpit, LOL! (not even OSX, for that matter)
Back to the subject, still many people fall for the overhyped 'dedicated' DSP marketing-hype, I did too, I had a HD3 rig, but I sold it, knowing a native system is plain faster.
They just have to get rid of their old stock-processors somehow.
Why do you think pc's and pc-laptops are so cheap nowadays?
Common sense m8
Old 19th November 2009
  #213
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
You know, they still use these old systems in planes, because you really don't want
Windows to be your OS in your cockpit, LOL! (not even OSX, for that matter)
Back to the subject, still many people fall for the overhyped 'dedicated' DSP marketing-hype, I did too, I had a HD3 rig, but I sold it, knowing a native system is plain faster.
They just have to get rid of their old stock-processors somehow.
Why do you think pc's and pc-laptops are so cheap nowadays?
Common sense m8
As i said, you're comparing two things that do not function in the same way and are not designed for the same purpose.
As for the "getting rid of the old chips" thing, the new UA hardware uses the most recent embedded DSP technology with Analog Devices SHARC processors, which have absolutely nothing common with an intel or even IBM proc architecture.
If you do a little bit of reasearch on what embedded processors actually are and how they work, you'll see that there's just no way to compare these two type of architecture.

As for being plain faster, that may be a workflow thing, but personally i work a lot faster with a few nice DSP systems and no processor power to waste on high-end plugins.
Old 19th November 2009
  #214
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spasm_dtc View Post
It seems you don't quite understand how these things work - you just can't compare an embedded DSP system to a micro-computer chip and it doesn't make sense to compare their clock frequencies and flop scores.
A good example would be the embedded systems running the flight management systems in modern planes - their processors are just a couple of hundred Mhz fast, but even if it had only that one task to do, a core i7 couldn't compete, let alone running a complex operating system like Windows or OS X on top of that.

Anyway, if the UA guys read this thread, they'll be laughing their asses off just seeing the huge controversy they raised with a simple email :D

That's total bull. Go over to the Lexicon plugin thread and listen to the developer himself (Nobody Special) talk about being free from the limitations of dsp. He worked on dsp for years and he knows what he is talking about. He basically said you can run 100+ Lex algorithms on a i7. I believe the real PCM96 has two dsp chips and you can run 1 (two if you stream firewire).
Old 19th November 2009
  #215
Lives for gear
 
FeatheredSerpent's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I'm really not. Having to put a PCI card in a computer just as a dongle is a stupid idea.
Well, I wouldn't go as far as to say it was stupid, but it's certainly inelegant.
But it is also in effect what we have with the current model.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Well, as you've already pointed out, PCI IS a thing of the past to Mac users. Doesn't matter how much sympathy you have for them, they make up a large chunk of the music-making population (particularly those serious enough about it to invest the sort of wedge needed for a UAD card). I also think 10 years is very optimistic for any technology these days, though I take your point about ISA being long dead.
Is pci-e no longer supported in macs either? That can't be true.
I really don't know.
I don't think any good can come from supporting a company like Apple, not any more, with their current hardware policies.
But, I don't hate mac users so much that I think their needs should not be considered. I do strongly oppose the opinion outlined in bold though, that's just simply not correct.
Also, 10 years is optimistic for processors and their sockets, also for ram, but it certainly isn't when it comes to standards that a huge market is based around, the main things here being storage connectors/controllers and expansion cards.
How long has ide been around for example, and how long will sata be around for? A long time, well over 10 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I don't know anyone with an HD3 running on Mac who runs a UAD card. In fact, I don't know anyone running HD anything with a UAD card. I know a few people who used to use the UAD TDM plugins, but then they were discontinued. And again, Mac users make up the majority of HD users (at the present moment in time).
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Please point me to a pro user who has done this! I know of pro users with 2 or 3 cards in their system. I've never even heard of anyone with magma chassis for UAD cards (unlike the HD PCI to PCIe upgrade, it's probably cheaper to just upgrade the machine to one with more slots) - and I also don't see why you bring up using more than 1 UAD2 card? that's perfectly fine and normal in one machine!
I can't argue this. It's just the impression I got from reading - I have seen the magma chassis mentioned quite a few times in the past with regard to running 4 uad-1 cards at once, and I just assumed that for the outlay, it was going to be pretty much exclusively pro users doing that.
I brought up the uad-2 cards because if you could run native, then you wouldn't need two uad-2 cards really, you could sell one on and use native power instead, so you would have more free slots than you did before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
And that makes total and utter sense - and I gave you credit for that. Like running RTAS versions of TDM plugins. What DOESN'T make any sense is to essentially have a blanking panel in your machine to do this, when an ilok license would do just as well, be portable, and work for laptop and desktop users alike. In fact - why not have the option? ilok for those of us who need it, and UAD card dongle for those who want/already have a "hardware dongle".
Well, yeah. But it's really going to rub people up the wrong way if it's not done right with regards to pricing. Everyone that has bought a dsp card thus far is not going to be happy if suddenly people can just buy the native plugs straight out.

The only way to level the situation is to
a) unlock the native plugs for free to all existing dsp card owners (the plugs they have already paid for and have authorised, that is).

b) provide all existing dsp card owners with a free ilok so that they have the same portability advantages as native-only owners.

I don't know how they will appease people with regards to their actual dsp hardware purchases - native-only users don't get the extra dsp, but then it can be argued that the dsp is no longer absolutely necessary.
Personally I only have one uad-1 card, but I have spent just over £1000 on plugs. Being sent an i-lok and having my paid-for plugs unlocked to native would suit me fine.
But, people that just bought a Quad card will not be happy, and those well-founded complaints will have to be addressed somehow.
And what is to become of the dsp cards themselves? They have had two big advantages - they have given us extra processing power in the past when we needed it, and they have ensured that the platform has developed healthily, due to lack of cracks available.

Extra dsp is always going to be a good thing really, so long as you have an ADC equipped system, but it is no longer as beneficial as it was before, so if the native option is opened up, those sales are going to drop rapidly.

Will the extra revenue from new native-only customers offset the drop in sales of dsp cards?
Even current dsp owners wouldn't feel the need to add any more cards if they had the native option. Which brings us to the second point, which is that the answer to the above question is yes, so long as the code remains safe, and people do actually have to buy the plugs in order to use them.
Someone has said before that other people are still developing despite their products being cracked, but these are mainly people that have been in the game a long time and have played the odds, which were better back in the day when things were still new and a bit lower profile.

A popular 'newer' developer like PsP comes up with great stuff, but how much further along would they be, and everyone else, if they were seeing the full revenue from their work?

So, protection:

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I love the way people are talking about iLok as if it's less than useless as copy protection, yet think that a dummy card or native plugins that use a DSP card as a dongle couldn't be cracked. There is NO DIFFERENCE in this, other than the shape of the thing acting as dongle. If iLok can be cracked (and this is a lot less prevelant than under tiger) then so can the UAD "PCI dongle".
As I said before, I have nothing against ilok, so long as it does the job it is intended to do.
This is based on the premise that ilok is more secure than the synchrosoft alternative, I don't know if that is true or not but if it is, all good.
I quoted someone before with regards to whether or not the native plugs can be cracked if they are in the 'dsp dongle' system, but I know nothing about that code side of things at all so don't know if it is accurate or not.

Either way, if the security is going to be breached then the whole thing is a waste of time in my opinion and we may as well stick with the dsp card system with the full range of native plugs being available only to owners of those cards, with a limited selection being available as native versions.

You can't be all things to all people, and if some imac users are going to miss out, then maybe they should buy a real computer.
(Sorry, couldn't resist!)
As for laptop users, I agree it's unfair to them, but then they will still always be able to get a laptop/solo and have all the advantages the desktop users have.

And I stand by my analogy that you say doesn't work.
When you make certain decisions, you do so knowing there are going to be pros and cons, and this goes for all things, always.
You make your decision based on what is more important to you, and you get on with it and do the best you can.
You don't make a decision and then whinge about the cons after the fact, despite knowing in advance what they were.

Well you can, but you won't get any sympathy from me.
Old 19th November 2009
  #216
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ciaccona View Post
I've always been hestant with DSP cards though I've been interested in some of their plugs.

Once they're native I'm in.
+ 1thumbsup
Old 19th November 2009
  #217
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Animus View Post
That's total bull. Go over to the Lexicon plugin thread and listen to the developer himself (Nobody Special) talk about being free from the limitations of dsp. He worked on dsp for years and he knows what he is talking about. He basically said you can run 100+ Lex algorithms on a i7. I believe the real PCM96 has two dsp chips and you can run 1 (two if you stream firewire).
you misread me or i wasn't clear...
'just read that, it does in no way contradict what i said there, which was an example describing the application field of DSPs compared to the fields PC procs are used for.
And again, they're not comparable using the references that apply to pc processors...
Sure DSP has limitations, sure you can run 100+ Lexicon algorythms on a Core i7 - that would be very troubling if you couldn't, given the age of most of the said algorythms and the chips they used to run on.
Old 19th November 2009
  #218
Lives for gear
 
PlayRadioPlay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by choukette View Post
yeah go ahead be native ... be cracked and piss of your actual and so loyal customers (you know the serious and solid customer base you have since the beginning) for moaning kids

kids want high end free cracked native plugins go native and you will bring them that,

yeah UA lose all the value you create slowly years after years on your so great plugins system in 3 weeks.

yeah UA break the trust with your partnership and deliver crackable plugins.

yeah UA bring us native version of yours plugins at 2-3 x the actual price just to survive to the warez

yeah UA becomes natives and kill yourself just because kids are jealous.

sorry guy all native plugins (even with any usb dongle) can be cracked and are cracked if you want them (even the last waves, the fact you didn't find them on google doesnt mean they didn't exist, cubase 5 is cracked too for instance),

the method to crack ilok or syncrosoft exist and can be use for any ilok/ syncrosoft protected plugin (even the most recent plugins)

the only plugins that are not cracked are on DSP (yeah i heard about sonnox on Poco but you still need a poco to run them and it was the only case) and that fact give DSP hosted plugin a real value. because they only run on the DSP (hybrid dsp/native version certainly open the door for craked version too)

all i read here from people who want native version of UAD plugins are kids jealousy, people with laptop or imac toy. Use real tools and stop moaning about the fact life isn't like you want.

mixing isn't a funny game for funny people on funny laptops, it's a serious work that need serious tools.

the world goes crazy each time we are obliged to satisfy all the silly marketted behaviors (no need mobility for mixing, you need working tools with serious monitoring in a good room, kids lost their time mixing on their bicycles, serious ingeeners don't do the 2 things at the same time ).
Man, if you're going to insult "kids", you should learn how to type and build a coherent thought/argument. Because, so far, this is the childish comment I've seen in here.

People are asking for a simple thing: not to have to buy hardware to run UA's wonderful software. That is a very simple, very reasonable request. Nobody has decided (for the simple fact that it isn't possible for any of us to know) how UA would implement Native plugs.

Anyone that has bought a UAD card will STILL have a UAD card if UA plugins go Native, and they will STILL be able to run more instances of plugins than people that are native.

Does UA have to go native? Of course not. Would it benefit them greatly? I believe so.

Also, I own a Quad Core Mac Pro, not an iMac.
Old 19th November 2009
  #219
FeatheredSerpent, I can't be bothered to requote any of it, but that makes a lot more sense from you. I'd certainly agree that IF there were to be native versions of the plugins, it would have to be with the proviso that those who have already bought them get them free (the same way TDM users get RTAS versions for just about all plugins that have RTAS versions available). That would almost go without saying (although I don't see why they should get iLoks sent out, that's maybe going a bit over the top!).

PCIe is the current standard for Mac Pros - it's PCI that got phased out with G5s. I didn't say anything to the contrary.

It's a good point too about native plugins causing a drop in DSP card sales. But if the anti-HD brigade are right about no longer needing TDM cards, there will very shortly come a time where people are going to question if they need DSP cards at all - and UAD will have to offer an alternative or bow out.
Old 19th November 2009
  #220
Gear Guru
 
Animus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spasm_dtc View Post
you misread me or i wasn't clear...
'just read that, it does in no way contradict what i said there, which was an example describing the application field of DSPs compared to the fields PC procs are used for.
And again, they're not comparable using the references that apply to pc processors...
Sure DSP has limitations, sure you can run 100+ Lexicon algorythms on a Core i7 - that would be very troubling if you couldn't, given the age of most of the said algorythms and the chips they used to run on.
okay cool.
Old 19th November 2009
  #221
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyronehowe View Post
Hello everyone

I think that I’ll be one of the minority, but I have just sold my two UAD-1 cards and all the plug-ins (I had almost all of them).

The quality of the plug-ins is excellent, no doubt about that, but other manufacturers are also producing excellent plug-ins. I felt that today’s machines are so powerful that extra DSP is no longer the attraction that it once was.


Certainly I would love UAD to go native. I would buy their plug-ins again because the quality is so high. But I won’t be buying again all the time I need non-portable hardware to use them.

I can’t help feeling that as more musicians turn to laptops for their work, UAD becomes a less attractive option.
You know I'm thinking of doing the same thing - I love UAD plugs but other native manufacturers are now coming up with the goods.
Old 19th November 2009
  #222
Lives for gear
 
PlayRadioPlay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
FeatheredSerpent, I can't be bothered to requote any of it, but that makes a lot more sense from you. I'd certainly agree that IF there were to be native versions of the plugins, it would have to be with the proviso that those who have already bought them get them free (the same way TDM users get RTAS versions for just about all plugins that have RTAS versions available). That would almost go without saying (although I don't see why they should get iLoks sent out, that's maybe going a bit over the top!).

PCIe is the current standard for Mac Pros - it's PCI that got phased out with G5s. I didn't say anything to the contrary.

It's a good point too about native plugins causing a drop in DSP card sales. But if the anti-HD brigade are right about no longer needing TDM cards, there will very shortly come a time where people are going to question if they need DSP cards at all - and UAD will have to offer an alternative or bow out.
This is interesting, because one of the reasons I don't want to buy UAD cards is that I'm planning on getting an HD rig eventually, and 1 of my slots is already taken up for an additional video card.
Old 19th November 2009
  #223
Lives for gear
 
code 10's Avatar
 

I can clearly see the point that some are making about UAD loosing their good rep if they go down the road of native as Waves has done with their what as an outsider seems quite draconian measures, I don't want to go in to the whole debacle about Waves as it's been done to death on here.

Maybe UAD have a very secure way of stopping their plugs from being cracked up their sleeves, possibly, maybe, if that was the case then maybe that would be super cool, as soon as DAW's like Logic, Cubase etc go 64 bit and the plug vendors do similar, on computers like the high end Mac Pro it will be a case of not looking back, the use DSP cards to off load CPU usage will be a relic of the past.

I personally don't have a problem with the UAD cards in my machine for the mean whilst, though saying that, in a few years time after things have moved on as I'm suggesting, I'd be like, why do I need these cards in my crazy monster powered Mac when the plugs could run fine natively.
Old 20th November 2009
  #224
Deleted 86c3d96
Guest
This thread makes me hesistant to drop the dough on the UAD-2 card. I have 2 UAD-1. I have one empty PCIe slot which is longing for a Lynx AES card. So, the UAD-2 is taunting me.

Don't be telling me native, and I am about to spend ~$1000 on another DSP card.

You know how much porn I could buy with that money? Heck, I could even get a real girl for that price (YMMV).
Old 20th November 2009
  #225
Lives for gear
 
boody's Avatar
 

I honestly can't understand what all the fuzz is about.

If you like the Uad plugs want the Uad plugs today you need to buy the uad-2 card.
If Uad goes native anywhere in the future and you still like the Uad plugs, you will work native.
This is all future speculation: Ua will not have all their plugs native before [A] they have milked the Uad-2 platform and [B] their partners agree on a new native extremely hard to crack platform, otherwise they will likely loose their partnerships.

Then again: in the far future Native is the only way to go. Computers will get smaller, cds/dvds will vanish, pci-e cards will get redundant, native can go low latency and is hassle free.

Or, Ua can get really clever and build a daw controlling mixer with mic pres, stellar converters and optional hardware and software plugins all integrated.
Old 20th November 2009
  #226
Lives for gear
 
FeatheredSerpent's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
FeatheredSerpent, I can't be bothered to requote any of it, but that makes a lot more sense from you. I'd certainly agree that IF there were to be native versions of the plugins, it would have to be with the proviso that those who have already bought them get them free (the same way TDM users get RTAS versions for just about all plugins that have RTAS versions available). That would almost go without saying (although I don't see why they should get iLoks sent out, that's maybe going a bit over the top!).

PCIe is the current standard for Mac Pros - it's PCI that got phased out with G5s. I didn't say anything to the contrary.

It's a good point too about native plugins causing a drop in DSP card sales. But if the anti-HD brigade are right about no longer needing TDM cards, there will very shortly come a time where people are going to question if they need DSP cards at all - and UAD will have to offer an alternative or bow out.
Cool, that quoting thing was getting to be a real drag!

Free ilok over the top - probably, but I like to drive a hard bargain

I think I was getting confused with the whole mac/imac/pci issue there, but as for the whole do we need dsp thing, I don't think there will ever be a point whree it is completely redundant.
The software developers do their very best to outstrip the hardware as quickly as they can, it's how we progress, one side pushing the envelope of the other, driving everything forward.
So even as powerful as our native systems are right now, you can still max out such a system if you are running cpu hungry plugs, and having the option to offload on to dsp will always be helpful, and not necessarily just for processing plug-ins, but for whatever other wild and wonderful devices they come up with in the future to try and drain our machine's resources.

Even with one uad-1 card, I can still get a very useful plug-in count, it's not enough for a whole mix as I rely on it for reverb so plenty of offline processing gets done, but give me a quad, ten times more processing power than I currently have, and that makes me think that it's still too early in the day to say that dsp is redundant.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #227
Gear Addict
 
Doktorfuture's Avatar
 

Soon enough we'll be able to buy 16 or 32 core computers for 999 bucks, and everything will be native.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #228
a realized a couple of days ago that the new macbook pros don't have express card slots

so i guess i can forget about the uad plug ins unless i decide to keep this macbook for a while longer than i wanted to or upgrade to a 17" macbook pro

native uad plug-ins challenge response would be great.. i'd buy them
Old 23rd November 2009
  #229
RiF
Lives for gear
 
RiF's Avatar
I wonder how long UA will be able to be in the competition with their DSP-cards. As a UAD-user since 2003, I really saw the benefit of having a DSP-card to help my CPU out... The high quality of the UAD plugins helped to go towards those cards. But nowadays, the DSP is the most limiting factor when it comes to plugin-count. You'll need a UAD-2 QUAD to run 32 SSL channel strips. I added Waves SSL 4000 channel strips on my laptop to see how many my 2x2GHz CPU could handle and got bored at about 50 or so and my RTAS usage meter has just been around 40%... My Core i5 would have been at about 20%, I guess.
For my personal requirements - having a great channel strip across all tracks (32+) - staying on the UAD platform will cost me $2000+ (solely due to performance reasons!), while getting the Waves SSL 4000 (not counting the WUP-****) will set me back just $600. And I haven't to deal with huge amounts of latency, which is completely free from any fun on PT LE...
Old 23rd November 2009
  #230
Lives for gear
 
kreeper_6's Avatar
 

Well if you want the Fatso & EMT 250, you have no choice now do ya?
Old 23rd November 2009
  #231
Lives for gear
 
DeadPoet's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiF View Post
For my personal requirements - having a great channel strip across all tracks (32+) - staying on the UAD platform will cost me $2000+
A matter of taste maybe, but the Neve 88-RS is a great channel strip as well and you get 100+ on a single Quad.

Also, the moment you go to a higher sample rate you'll lose performance with the Waves' strip and won't with the UAD ssl strip because it upsamples (the no.1 reason why it is so heavy on the dsp btw)



Herwig
Old 23rd November 2009
  #232
RiF
Lives for gear
 
RiF's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadPoet View Post
A matter of taste maybe, but the Neve 88-RS is a great channel strip as well and you get 100+ on a single Quad.
To be honest, I like the 88RS even better than the SSL. But the SSL served well for a DSP/native comparison.
Old 23rd November 2009
  #233
RiF
Lives for gear
 
RiF's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kreeper_6 View Post
Well if you want the Fatso & EMT 250, you have no choice now do ya?
F**k, I don't have a choice because of a lot of unique UAD plugins (Plate 140, 88RS, Precision Maximizer, CE-1, ...)! That's what makes me so upset! To continue using those, I a) have to upgrade to a UAD-2 (at least DUO) sooner or later and b) switch away from PT LE because of the latency (no ATA please!). Grrrmphffffffggg...
Old 23rd November 2009
  #234
Lives for gear
 
Entrainer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kreeper_6 View Post
Well if you want the Fatso & EMT 250, you have no choice now do ya?
I guess I see the UAD card as more an "outboard" special processing tool. I use it for the 33609, Fatso, EMT-250, RE201, and Moog Filter.

So, the "limited" amount of DSP isn't a concern. If you notice, all the above named plugs are some of the heaviest in terms of processing power... but they sound GREAT.

For EQ, I'm now using a combination of X-EQ and Nebula... really can't see needing anything else ATM.
Old 24th November 2009
  #235
Lives for gear
 
XAXAU's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kreeper_6 View Post
Well if you want the Fatso & EMT 250, you have no choice now do ya?
Boing! And the almighty Cooper Time Cubethumbsup
Old 24th November 2009
  #236
Lives for gear
 
electricsound's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by XAXAU View Post
Boing! And the almighty Cooper Time Cubethumbsup
love this thing. this & the EMT250 are what finally made me move up to the UAD-2
Old 24th November 2009
  #237
Gear Nut
 
newrigel's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Animus View Post
lol

They have "had" a working business model. The UAD2 is already long in the tooth with the new i7/i5. When the next generation of Intel processors come out they will totally blow UAD out of the water. Native plugins are now rivaling UAD plugs if not surpassing them. The issue is scalability. Native plugs will be able to scale along with native processors as they become faster. UA can start modeling harmonics/non-linearities etc (as we have seen in Fatso) but at a higher cost of dsp resources. Eventually we will have to have 4 UAD2 QUADs in out computers to run these "hungry" plugins. And let's not even mention latency. With native plugins I can run at a 32 buffer. A half loaded UAD2 Quad makes me have to run at 128 and above.

I have been a UAD owner since 2001 but I have to admit I am seriously considering ditching it.
It's funny...
Give me ten minutes with your i7 or i5 and I'll lock that thing right on up!
You guy's talk like these things are a God or something... I use and support UA's
platform not only as an added amount of processing but as a dongle to thwart piracy!
They'll go the route like SSL with the hybrid approach long before they ditch the cards... and more power to them for doing it!
i7, i5... Whatever
Old 24th November 2009
  #238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted User View Post
Hey, don't forget: also for those of us who don't have a big W-shaped chip on our shoulder nor a dongle stuck in the a
ccessible USB port... oh, oh, oh, and also those who understand that there's an IMPORTANT difference between what some weird people call a DSP hw dongle AND a mere dongle, UAD going native would be a good idea too. Cane has a point too, though I haven't had any issues with UAD2 except for the multiprocessor nightmare caused mainly by Cubase to a great extent, not only UAD. Certain attention-needy englich feloows should know already that metioning others' nationalities just leads to others doing the same, which then leads to broken nails and blah, blah.


I rather __________ (anything), than buying a UAD product that uses a dongle, specifically (for those with understanding problems) either a synchrosoft dongle or an ilok dongle and anything similar.

But again, the chances of UA showing us, their loyal customers, the finger, I mean, the useless plastic dongle are as feasible as are the chances of iLok and Synchrosoft realizing the amount of time they have wasted (they didn't waste too much money, they charged everything on us), ie, NONE.

UA cares for their customers! yaay!!

But anyway, I'll attack first just in case: fuuck

That was not for you UA!
Why exactly am I needy and attention seeking? I only mentioned nationality to identify you in a jokey way anyway...no need to to take such offense.

I really don't understand your hatred of ilok though. I can understand you PREFERRING DSP cards, but to say "if they go iLok, I'd use anything but" is (as we say in English) "cutting off your nose to spite your face" - or in other words, limiting yourself by misguided principles.

As far as I'm concerned, a DSP card is a DSP card, a dongle is a dongle and an interface is an interface (for those using PT LE). The fact that all 3 can provide the dongle function is really neither here nor there.

Would you still abandon UA if they gave you the choice, as FeatheredSerpent and I have already debated above? You can either use DSP card as a dongle and run extra native plugins (a la TDM/RTAS systems) OR you can use an iLok? or would you ditch UA on principle because they've even talked to PACE?!

Like I've said before, UA, whilst they may be making decisions right now that appeal to you, are just another business. You seem to hold them as some holy grail of music industry company - I don't know if you have inside information, but even the compatibility issues have you blaming Steinberg instead - which indicates bias straight away. Maybe they are a little more personable than some others, but they're not going to take decisions that cost them profitability just to keep a few fanatics totally happy (btw I have no intention on getting into a discussion on customers satisfaction/profitability, I know the 2 are closely related).

All I'm saying is you seem very close-minded against certain things, without actually having a great reason for it.
Old 24th November 2009
  #239
Lives for gear
 
True North's Avatar
 

I have had nothing but problems with my UAD-2 Quad

I have a Dual Quad Rig and I just can't get the card to play nice on my system. It was a real dissapointment.

+10000000000000000000000000 on going native..................

ASSUMING of course that current users would get them for free.

Come on UAD, I don't care how you dongle it just let me use the plugs natively
Old 24th November 2009
  #240
Gear Nut
 
newrigel's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by True North View Post
I have had nothing but problems with my UAD-2 Quad

I have a Dual Quad Rig and I just can't get the card to play nice on my system. It was a real dissapointment.

+10000000000000000000000000 on going native..................

ASSUMING of course that current users would get them for free.

Come on UAD, I don't care how you dongle it just let me use the plugs natively
Works just fantastic for me and I have an SSL Duende also! They are working flawlessly on my system... by the way is a 2.66 MP. Probably something else on your system. I run really lean on my audio machines just because of the problems that can happen.
And what makes you think going native is the cure to your problem? Could be your host, other NATIVE plugs etc. so.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
theskids / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
2
Joram / So much gear, so little time
2
jimmydeluxe / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
12
Mixocalypse / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
cww2 / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
7

Forum Jump
Forum Jump